tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 15 10:55:41 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: oops



According to Nick NICHOLAS:
...
> (charghwI's transcript of ST:V)
> 
> =>Klaa: qIpmeH Qatlh'a' (Difficult to hit?) 
> 
> Oh my god.
> 
> Does anybody remember the whole "naghmeH chechqu'" business?
> 
> And I've already changed all my texts, too. Just as well, I suppose. The
> alternative (naghlaHbe' chechmo') is cleaner.
> 
> If anyone reckons qIpmeH Qatlh'a' doesn't support naghmeH chechqu', speak up!
> 
> Nick.

On the one hand, I do see this as a canon usage of {-meH} that
is contrary to ~mark's interpretation of it. "In order to hit
it, is it difficult?" is gibberish. Meanwhile, "Is it difficult
for the purpose of hitting?" kinda almost makes some twisted
sense, along the lines of my "tlhIngan Hol DajatlhmeH Da[ be
skilled]," that ~mark objected to.

On the other hand, ST5 was such a stinker of a movie and had
such incredibly slimey examples of Klingon in it. I also seem
to remember {je} being used as a conjunction BETWEEN nouns. Do
we change the way we use {je} because of that?

charghwI'



Back to archive top level